Over the weekend, Minnesotans United for All Families introduced an impressive new tool that at least a few prominent Minnesota Republicans think goes too far.

"The kNOw Tool" essentially provides a database of your Facebook friends. But when you click on their names, two multiple-choice questions pop up: "How do you think your friend will vote on the marriage amendment?" (possible responses range from "100% Vote No" to "100% Vote Yes") and "What is your confidence level of their vote?" MN United then uses that information to target likely-to-vote-yes voters with calls and emails in hopes of swaying their vote.

MN United's Richard Carlbom took to Facebook to shed further light on the tool's purpose:

Here's a bit more from a statement on kNOw's homepage:

Through this tool you will be able to identify the support level of your friends, family and neighbors. Then, after having the critical conversation about why it's important to vote NO on this hurtful amendment, you can track your conversations here to help our campaign!

kNOw was quickly denounced by Minnesota for Marriage Deputy Campaign Manager Andy Parrish, who's apparently concerned about MN United intimidating amendment supporters with a barrage of phone calls and emails:

In response to a Parrish-authored fundraising letter citing numerous examples of alleged bad behavior by amendment opponents at the State Fair, Kevin Watterson, director of media services for the MNGOP House caucus, chimed in: "Don't worry, I'm sure they'll be much nicer when they find your address and come to your house to change your mind."

On Sunday, Rep. Mary Franson, R-Alexandria, took to Facebook to denounce kNOw "with a heavy heart."

Mary might think it's vile, but with the amendment vote looking like "a toss up," if kNOw can help MN United sway even a handful of votes from 'yay' to 'nay,' it could make all the difference come November 6.

I don't like this tool. Facebook already makes a lot of things a bit too personal as it is. You are tempted to comment on things you feel strongly about or like stuff that may be controversial, which may be public regardless if that is your intent. Some friends and onlookers, depending on their personalities and views, see your random comments as an afront. It makes one want to stay off facebook altogether. That is not my intent when I joined.

I don't like this tool. Facebook already makes a lot of things a bit too personal as it is. You are tempted to comment on things you feel strongly about or like stuff that may be controversial, which may be public regardless if that is your intent. Some friends and onlookers, depending on their personalities and views, see your random comments as an afront. It makes one want to stay off facebook altogether. That is not my intent when I joined.

Hey, here's a simple way to judge whether or not such a thing is acceptable or not: ask yourself what your reaction would be in the "other guys" did the same thing. If your reaction to Republicans creating and using a website like that would be disgust, horror and/or contempt, you might want to rethink your creation/use of it.

The anti-marriage folks just didn't think of using FaceBook. Not surprising. How many people on FaceBook intend to vote "Yes" anyway? As much trouble as Mary Franson gets herself into online, she should stick to hand-written manuscripts or clay tablets.

@jinxmchue By that same token, don't you think it's ironic that a group wishing to constitutionally dictate the terms of other people's personal lives have their knickers in a twist over having their own relationships bent by political pressure?

@keny1 If you actually thought and/or did research for yourself, this campaign tool would not be necessary. I'm guessing the goal is to educate, not harass. And unlike lengthy debates on macroeconomics, this decision is rather obvious given at least a little education on the topic.... :-\